Is a defendant's contention that an error in judgment is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Kent, C062332 (Cal. App. 2018):

As to count 11, defendant's contention fails because the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. (Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24 [17 L.Ed.2d 705, 710-711] (Chapman).)

Other Questions


If defendant fails to establish all the errors of the trial court as a cumulative result of the cumulative error, can he continue to argue that the cumulative effect of the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and mandates reversal? (California, United States of America)
What is the federal harmless error standard for determining that an error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is Defendant's contention that erroneous admission of uncharged misconduct evidence should be evaluated under the harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard for federal constitutional error? (California, United States of America)
How has the prosecution and defense argued that the error in Beeman error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is the error in failing to suppress a defendant's extrajudicial statements made without a proper Miranda admonition harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
What is the test for determining whether a defendant's error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
Is there any reasonable doubt that there would have been no reasonable doubt in a jury finding a defendant guilty absent the error? (California, United States of America)
Does a trial court error of inadequately warning a defendant of the pitfalls and hazards involved in self-representation constitute harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
If a defendant's request for reappointment of counsel for a preliminary hearing was rejected immediately before the preliminary hearing commenced, is such error harmless even under the beyond-the-reasonable doubt standard? (California, United States of America)
Does the Attorney General's error in admitting evidence of a defendant's inconsistent testimony in the prosecution's case in chief, rather than for impeachment purposes, be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.